Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 23 AUGUST 2021

Invoking Norwich Pharmacal Relief Against The Less Than Innocent

Gatehouse Chambers
Gatehouse Chambers
Contributor
Gatehouse Chambers

Gatehouse Chambers

Gatehouse Chambers is a leading commercial set with expertise spanning commercial dispute...

View firm profile
Explore more from Gatehouse Chambers

Considering a Part 8 claim for Norwich Pharmacal relief, the Court decided that the jurisdiction was properly invoked despite the defendant arguing that pre-action disclosure was available against him.

United KingdomLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

In this piece, Lauren Godfrey looks at Rowland & Anor v Stanford [2021] EWHC 988 (Ch).

Mini summary

Considering a Part 8 claim for Norwich Pharmacal relief, the Court decided that the jurisdiction was properly invoked despite the defendant arguing that pre-action disclosure was available against him. A defendant being a putative wrongdoer was not a necessary pre-requisite of relief but equally it did not prevent relief. Further, the Court found the Defendant's concern that the Claimants be cross-examined on their application misplaced.

Further, the Court considered the fact and scope of the defendant's right to protection against self-incrimination. The Court noting there was no general right but rather an individual's rights ideally should be considered in light of established and credible risk of incrimination in respect of specific criminal offences. Further, there was a distinction between material already in existence and evidence brought into existence by

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from